THE STORY – Count Dracula, a 15th-century prince, is condemned to live off the blood of the living for eternity. Young lawyer Jonathan Harker is sent to Dracula’s castle to finalize a land deal, but when the Count sees a photo of Harker’s fiancée, Mina, the spitting image of his dead wife, he imprisons him and sets off for London to track her down.
THE CAST – Gary Oldman, Winona Ryder, Anthony Hopkins, Keanu Reeves, Richard E. Grant, Cary Elwes, Billy Campbell, Sadie Frost & Tom Waits
THE TEAM – Francis Ford Coppola (Director) & James V. Hart (Writer)
THE RUNNING TIME – 128 Minutes
Film is, first and foremost, a visual medium. This is a rudimentary fact, but too many modern movies seem to forget that, choosing to focus on belabored plot mechanics and dialogue-heavy storytelling over the creation of compelling screen imagery. Not so with “Bram Stoker’s Dracula,” Francis Ford Coppola’s 1992 adaptation of history’s most well-known vampire story. With his film, the legendary director pushes the aesthetic possibilities of film, using every tool in the toolbox and inventing some new ones for good measure. It’s so crammed full of gorgeous visuals that it feels like it might burst, which is only appropriate for a film all about the seductive power of lush, ravishing beauty.
In terms of story, “Bram Stoker’s Dracula” is a fairly faithful adaptation of the legendary novel. The young solicitor Jonathan Harker (Keanu Reeves) ventures to remote Transylvania to meet with Count Dracula (Gary Oldman), a mysterious client whom Harker is taking from his former colleague, the recently insane Renfield (Tom Waits). Upon meeting the count, Harker is imprisoned after Dracula sees a picture of Harker’s fiancée, Mina (Winona Ryder), who strongly resembles the immortal vampire’s long-lost love, Elisabeta. He sets his blood-thirsty brides on Harker to feed upon him as he departs for England in pursuit of Mina.
Coppola and screenwriter James V. Hart were wise to keep the story as familiar as possible so that the non-plot elements of the film could be severely emphasized without distracting the audience’s comprehension of the story. In fact, how Coppola drowns his film in beauty makes the audience feel as if they, like Dracula’s victims, are being drawn in and tempted by a world of overwhelming pleasure and enchantment. Eiko Ishioka’s legendary Oscar-winning costumes give the film an overarching feeling of richness and luxury. Mina and her doomed friend Lucy (Sadie Frost) are dressed in floral colors, which serves as a welcome contrast to the earthy, lusty apparel and trappings of Dracula’s castle. The count himself swishes through his abode in an array of long, heavily draped fabrics, bringing to mind ancient monarchical families and all their inherent wealth and power. He even wears a gown clearly inspired by the gold geometric patterns of the painter Gustav Klimt. It hardly matters that the film takes place before Klimt would paint some of his most famous works – the impression upon the audience is one of spectacular wonderment. The count balances out his hideous, aged appearance (the horrifying makeup also won an Oscar) with these opulent garments. Conversely, when he magically takes on a younger form in London, his clothing becomes much more modern and form-fitting, accentuating his sudden youthfulness.
In 2024, a common wish amongst film lovers is to return to practical special effects instead of ineffective CGI work. “Bram Stoker’s Dracula” was released at the dawn of computer-generated effects becoming mainstream (“Jurassic Park” was released the following year and changed the cinematic world forever), and it stands as one of the last studio horror films to make a concerted effort to achieve as many in-camera effects as possible. They hold up to this day, not necessarily because they’re all believable or trick the audience, but because the care and attention put into them makes them timeless, as opposed to digital visual effects that age with each passing year. Coppola wisely uses decades-old tricks – such as match cuts, clever editing, forced perspective, miniatures, reversed footage, and more – to place the audience in the film’s vampiric world. The effects are uncanny, giving viewers the same “something is wrong” chills that the characters feel.
The use of lighting and shadows is some of the greatest in film history. Dracula’s shadow is practically a separate character, invading scenes where his physical body isn’t present to be sure that his energy is constantly felt. He’s cloaked over the entire film like an ominous shroud. And when he is seen on-screen, his shadow will often not align with his movements, as if to suggest that when he took on his unholy vampiric form, he corrupted his soul in a way that separated him from the very laws of time and space which rule our natural world. The Oscar-winning sound effects, however, are what truly surround viewers with a symphony of constant distress. Dracula’s castle is underscored with an omnipresent soundtrack of otherworldly groans and off-screen growls, creating a palpable sense of fear and tension.
The legendary count is brought to life by a truly unhinged Gary Oldman. He’s an actor who gained fame for his propensity to go big, and Dracula is no different. But unlike in some films, here his over-the-top choices work. Dracula is quite literally a monstrous creature, so it’s not unreasonable for his energy to be unpredictable and wild. The only downside to his mammoth performance is that it makes Keanu Reeves look worse by comparison. Reeves struggles throughout the film. His character has to have a certain quality of cluelessness, either because he’s intentionally ignoring the strangeness around him at the castle or because he’s led such a sheltered life that he doesn’t know how to behave. However, Reeves is simply vacant, which is even more noticeable when Oldman is going ham in the same scenes, highlighting the stark contrast in their performances.
With “Bram Stoker’s Dracula,” Francis Ford Coppola crafts a Gothic masterpiece. He one-ups the 1931 “Dracula,” which stars Bela Lugosi, by being able to portray all of the unbridled sexual implications that come with any vampire story, and he does so through immense, intense beauty. Like the powers of the mythical creatures, the film occasionally ignores logic, instead emphasizing emotion and the instinctual impressions that the stunning visuals bring out in the audience. It’s impossible not to give in to its charms.
